[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-ha-dev
Subject:    Re: [Linux-ha-dev] [Patch] RA: nfsserver: Preparing
From:       Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb () suse ! de>
Date:       2009-07-29 14:16:35
Message-ID: 20090729141635.GH3466 () suse ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

On 2009-07-28T12:42:38, "Raoul Bhatia [IPAX]" <r.bhatia@ipax.at> wrote:

> Q. is this enough to set a default value for
> ${OCF_RESKEY_nfs_max_block_size} ? i am asking because in other ra's,
> there is a special check like:
> 
>    : ${OCF_RESKEY_config_dir=""}
> 
> at the beginning of the script.

Good catch, that needs to happen. This is only the default for newly
created resources via the GUI; the CRM shell ignores default settings
as Dejan wrongly disagrees about their usefulness.

> > +	ocf_log info "Preparing /proc/fs/nfsd first"
> > +	if [ ! -f /proc/fs/nfsd/max_block_size ] ; then
> > +	   mount -t nfsd nfsd /proc/fs/nfsd
> > +	fi
> 
> Q. is it necessary to check if /proc/fs/nfsd exists?
> Q. shouldn't we check for a failed mount and exit in this case?

This is specific setup detail for Linux; the code should likely be
skipped on other platforms. Modules may need to be loaded etc. Yes, the
code as above is too trivial and does not contain enough checking.

> Q. is it possible that max_block_size can be found at a different
>    location. i'm thinking about *bsd/solaris/etc. platforms.

Other platforms need to have port-specific fixes, which we'll leave to
whomever ports them ;-)



Regards,
    Lars

-- 
Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde

_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]